Totoo kaya ito? Partner ng isang sikat na loding artista; malaki daw ang contribution sa kandidatura ng namumuno? Saan ililipat?

It is more fun criticizing

Will can the Senate judges impeach the VP

It is more fun criticizing

Since the impeachment  trials have been the spectator sports lately (for which the nation spends millions daily) we might as well join the fray.

Despite all the efforts to diminish the opposition votes to free the subject VP,  the Chief Judge Escudero made the the ruling and others too, that 16 is the magic number of vote to impeach the VP.   They only have 13 at the moment  If the ruling of was 2/3 of members present (minus Marcoleta, Jinggoy E,  Bato, that would mean 2/3 x  21 = 14.  Just one swing vote....

Ombudsman readies charges for preliminary investigation vs alleged leaders in flood control scandal ahead of SONA

It is more fun criticizing

Ombudsman file cases for preliminary investigation

Monday will the fifth SONA of the PBBM regime;   only 2 legislation for this year vs 50 or so planned.  What a legislatie achievement for a body with a trillion budget.   

Perhaps too will be the announcement that the administration has taken punitive steps vs flood control sheniggans... And so before Monday SONA, the Ombudsman is a hasty manner has filed a 104 page complaint vs the President's relative and Z Co so that a preliminary investigation.   And as usual the legal team of the said party has said the congressman is ready to face the charges.  And the PR legal stance is that the good legislator is in no way connected to the corruption charges.   

Why just now before the SONA?  For its PR effect?

And the guess is he will get away with it... What do you think.?

In the meantime enjoy watching the horrendous flood videos and pictures....Why did this happen.?  Blame climate change?   Well zillions were budgetted for this allegedly to mitigate the flooding dire consequences.    Despite the huge budget running into billions, were there scientific and serious studies, plans vs the flood and recognizign that some 20 typhoons visit the country annually and that climate change has made them more severe?

On impeachment: commentaries (not conclusion)

It is more fun criticizing

This post concerns commentaries regarding the "pasabog testimony"  of the last witness for the Art. IV of the impeachment vs VP Duterte.

The testimony of the star witness was considereably weakened and holes found (not enough evidence and or preparation?

1.  The continued answer of the good director saying he has direct personal knowledge of the investigation made by the agents, and previous to his appointment.    He has therefore impeached himself as a credible witness for being a hearsay witness  (Article 130 Section 22 where Vinluan reviewed the 29 year law veteran on the subject) , and admitting that his wife, a congresswoman (who sponsored the impeachment

2.  Pia Cayetanos pointing out that the good director was not 100% truthful in his communications regading the Senate GSIS  incident and that impeaches the witness.  

3.   The director was not subpoenaed but merely invited by the  prosecution

4.  The continued effort and as objected to by the Prosecution to make legal conclusions on the facts presented as with the Kapunan speech.    The Chief Judge continued to remind the prosecution ot stop making conclusion on the evidence presented.   It is for the Court to decide. The NBI director, it would seem did not stop to make conclusion.   It is often the danger to invite a judge, a DOJ employee to make judgement as they are asked questions in the court - they can make conclusion and draw away the judges from the main agenda of the case.    Propaganda statements could be made.   

5  While the prosecution maintained that it is not a court proceeding, nevertheless, the rules of evidence was in effect.   And the Article 130 sec 22 did in the good witness.     

6.  The Prosecution does not seem to have enough solid evidences, nor proponderance as was the request ot subpoena bank records   Is the fishing for evidence statement correct?  

The Lascana affidavit was neither signed nor notarized

According to one post, 7/10 citizens are not interested to view the  impeachment proceeding which according to them has become very technical....  Full of legalese, technicalities, and  difficult to follow and understand

When is somebody an expert? - you need 10,000 hours experience

It is more fun criticizing

10,000 hours to be an expert

In the current impeachment trial, some personalities were presented as experts.   "forensic expert"  It turns out that the said witness only spent two months in the field

As per Malcolm Gladwell in his book "Outliers"  you can only be considered an expert when you have been exposed and spent 10,000 in the said field (or roughtly 10 years.

We should be more careful in using the term